This MOOC provides insight into the refugee phenomenon as one of the most complex, compelling and (arguably) misunderstood features of the 21st century. Taking a global perspective, it will outline the fundamentals of who ‘refugees’ are, where they come from and where they go, as well as delving into the features of the global system for refugee protection and ‘solutions’ for those who have been forcibly displaced. It places the student at the centre of the learning experience through engagement with a range of robust and challenging activities, materials and online peer engagement.

배우게 될 기술

Practice evaluating on-the-ground problems to identify pertinent solutions, Practice navigating online in order to engage with specialised resources, Learn to engage with technical concepts language and materials, Practice sifting complex factual information to identify important features and trends, Learn to apply technical legal and policy categories to a range of factual scenarios

검토

Filled StarFilled StarFilled StarFilled StarHalf Faded Star

4.7(54개의 평가)

5 stars

70%

4 stars

26%

3 stars

4%

BD

Apr 25, 2020

Filled StarFilled StarFilled StarFilled StarFilled Star

This course is in short a complete picture of the refugee regime in today's world. I love its contents, the methodology and the reference materials!

SR

Mar 23, 2020

Filled StarFilled StarFilled StarFilled StarFilled Star

This is an amazing opportunity for refugees and anybody in the world. Thank you fo the Initiative

수업에서

Week four: Solving the 'refugee problem'

With forced displacement at such high levels, a crucial component of the refugee protection regime is finding durable, long-lasting solutions for refugees and displaced persons. This session introduces you to the three core ‘durable solutions’ for refugees: voluntary repatriation, local integration and resettlement. You will examine the similarities and differences between these forms of durable solution, and the challenges that lack of solutions in practice pose for refugees around the world. This week we will be looking to explore the following areas: the concept of ‘solutions’ for refugees as the end of refugee status; the similarities and differences between the three main ‘durable solutions’ for refugees, and; the process and challenges of (lack of) solutions in a real-life case study.

강사:

Professor David Cantor

Dr Sarah Singer

스크립트

Last week, we studied the global system of refugee protection. We will move on now, to looking at solutions for refugees or in many cases the implications of lack of solutions in practice. There were three traditional durable solutions as explained in your reading this week from UNHCR. These are; repatriation to the home country, integration in the host state, and resettlement to a third state. We will explore each of these solutions and some of the limitations inherent in them in turn. Refugeehood is often conceived of as a temporary state. The idea is that an individual or group of people is provided protection for a specific and limited period of time, following which they'll return, be repatriated back to their home country. However, for many refugees repatriation is not possible. For example, because of continuing conflicts in their home country or weak infrastructure which makes access to basic rights limited. Equally, many refugees may have legitimate reasons for not wishing to return to their home country. These could be related to the trauma they may have suffered on leaving or because they've established a new life in their host country. Refugees born in displacement may have no knowledge of their parent's home country. As pointed out by Chimni in your readings for this week, the focus on repatriation often assumes that all refugees wish to return home. But this may not necessarily be the case. Even if returned, refugees may not necessarily return to their former place of residence. Instead, they may continue to move around the country or indeed leave the country again. Bearing these factors in mind, to what extent should or must repatriation be voluntary? What does voluntary mean in this context? Perhaps, this is something you could discuss with your classmates this week. It's clear that states have an obligation of non-refoulement, that refugees must not be returned to a country in which they will face persecution. But how far does this obligation not to return refugees to persecution extend? What other conditions need to be in place in countries of origin to ensure that refugees can be returned safely? To what extent must or should the refugees own wishes be taken into account? Some of the questions surrounding involuntary repatriation are explored by Chimni in your readings this week. In Week 1 of this course, we saw that despite the media attention focused on refugees who migrate from the global south to the global north, the overwhelming majority of refugees remain in their regions of origin. The second traditional solution we will consider is that of local integration: permanent settlement in the country where the refugee has found protection. Again, the availability of this solution can be limited in practice. This is because host states predominantly in the global south and often with limited resources themselves, are often reluctant to accept the permanent large-scale local integration of refugee populations in their host communities. Some of the concerns states have in hosting large numbers of refugees and the challenges posed to integration are explored in this week's readings on protracted displacement. With countries in the global south hosting the vast majority of refugees, many are in practice overstretched. At the same time however, it can be difficult for refugees to seek protection in the global north. As we'll explore in more detail next week, refugees are often caught up in migration control measures and lack regular legal routes to gain admission to countries in the global north which would allow them to claim asylum there. The key legal route by which refugees may seek admission to and protection in countries in the global north is the third traditional solution; resettlement. Organized resettlement schemes involve relocating to a third country which offers the refugee permanent residents. These are usually overseen by UNHCR in coordination with the receiving state government or civil society groups. However, the number of resettlement places made available by countries in the global north is really tiny compared to the number of refugees today, even if we only compare to the number of refugees living in protracted refugee situations. Resettlement can therefore be a useful protection tool for individual refugees in danger. But unless there's a change in current practice and more resettlement places become available, this cannot make a significant inroad in finding lasting solutions for large numbers of refugees. Partly in response to these concerns, there's increasing attention today on the positive impacts of refugees on the local community if they have the opportunity to work and contribute and also on the agency of refugees themselves. Equally, as the limitations of the three durable solutions become more apparent, some have argued for a different more comprehensive approach to solutions which connects refugees with broader peace-building and development efforts. In what ways may reframing refugees from a problem to an opportunity, affect the global response to the refugee phenomenon? Finally, some have argued that as an alternative mobility either within the host country or moving outside that country can play an important role in achieving durable solutions for refugees. UNHCR has begun to explore the potential for migration channels to enhance refugee protection and access to solutions. This is something you might want to keep in mind in preparation for next week's session where we look at refugees as migrants.